To those offended by "Pure Fiction", it is not my intention to accuse vaccine defenders of fabricating information. It is my intention to point out key weaknesses in the manner in which very important issues are approached or presented.
If people don't care about how others will perceive professionalism, quality of proof and studied analysis, fine. I do, and I also think that transparency is important. Perhaps the original website and his manner, is him being transparent. If so, that's a major cause for concern.
But I, for one, am also very concerned at the way in which Dr Andrew Moulden has presented himself in public so far, such as his posts at Oprah and his radio appearances. His first website attempt was shocking and repulsed even Americans who saw it. Unfortunately I forgot to take a screen shot, or pdf it. The impression his website created was pointed out to him by email (not by me). The subsequent version is slightly better, but remains unprofessional in my opinion. As of today (16 October 2008), we should not have to find his CV/publication list on another site. Or should I say... a document which to me is a lot of hot air, and a list primarily consisting of things he might publish in the future.
I'm sorry if readers are offended by my uber wariness, but I'm not impressed. Those of us questioning vaccines are used to being told how unprofessional we are (!). It's my opinion that someone with the degree of education claimed by Dr Moulden, has been ill-advised as to how to present himself to the public of any persuasion.
Parents raising vaccine-injured children are particularly vulnerable targets for misinformation about vaccines, and vaccine injury. They wouldn't be "anti-vax" or "clutching at straws" had they not found themselves facing a lifetime of caring for their vaccine-injured, brain-damaged children without meaningful input from pharmaceutical medicine. In that position, most would find any anti-vax statement or promise of cure very appealing, especially coming from a doctor with such a long string of credentials, who sounds so knowledgeable, gads around the countryside, and is running for Parliament.
It's so natural for these parents to think, "At last, someone has listened to us, and believes us!" It is only natural the next step would be a plea along the lines of, "Please, please... help us get our children out of the mess they are in."
To me, the central core of due diligence in practice is sticking to the science; and where possible, proveable, reproducible, published hard fact before the marketting and profitting from any "breakthrough" technology or treatment. Anything less, is I believe, a disservice to everyone, including Dr Moulden himself. No doubt some will argue that the children will benefit, but that is conjecture at this point.
In the meantime, I'm sticking by my own advice over the years to parents, which is that if something doesn't feel right, don't do it. Trust is earned, not a given.